2. speakers
  3. 165297-138652

I just bought a Steinway which sounds like a banjo.

I have a question: I’ve seen a lot of terms in audiophile jargon: laid back, top end, low end, harsh, soft, smooth, etc.
I don’t understand them. I only listen to recorded music, almost nothing synthesized. So the adjectives I know are: pitch, timbre, dynamics and spatiality. I cannot think of sound characteristics that are not inscribed within these four adjectives.
I believe that a sound reproduction device must first of all take care to satisfy these 4 characteristics.

When I read that a loudspeaker sounds harsh to me it means that the timbre is wrong because nobody would describe as harsh the reproduction of an instrument that has a harsh timbre. That would be a speaker that has a correct timbre. It can only be described as harsh the reproduction of an instrument that does not have a harsh timbre. The same goes for the other terms listed at the beginning. For spatiality it is even simpler because it is a geometric, spatial question. An ensable of which occupies 5 meters must sound like an ensambe that occupies 5 meters, not as one that occupies 2 meters nor as one that occupies 20 meters. Then the dynamics is linear so it is the simplest of all.

When Steinway puts a Steinway on the market it does so by taking care of a certain amount of objective characteristics, i would say 96-98% and 2-4% are probably left to the "character" of the instrument.

In the audiophile field, judging by the immense difference between one reproduction technology and another, it seems that the opposite meter is used, that is 4% of objectivity and 96% of character.
As if a Steinway sounded like a forgotten Pleyel in a basement, and a Pleyel sounded like a Boesendorfer. The whole is defended with sword drawn by the audiophile community as and cleared as subjective perceptions or eventually as an incompatibility between the elements in play (source, amplifier, speakers, cables) Hahah! Obviously, if all the products that follow the 4% objectivity meter and 96% "character", it takes a lot of luck to have a system in your hands that allows you to recognize a Pleyel from a Steinway.

When will sound reproduction become serious?
128x128daros71
recluse
268 posts
 
Wine tasting sensory analysis utilizes a wheel with descriptors EVERYONE can relate to.

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/69805862948082256/

Maybe the audio industry should follow with a similar standard.

justinjwilliams
4 posts
 
I have a triangle that sounds like a square...

pindac's avatar
pindac
2,492 posts
 
A individual I spoke to recently who has a unrestricted access to some of the Hi End Vinyl Source Devices that those with a generous
Disposable Income would veer toward, has informed me that their most wanted on the Wish List device, is the Steinway and Sons Speaker Model.
The Model with the Largest Bass Units was referenced,
this model is their Speaker of Interest if they can find a decent sum of money to put toward them.
As for Retail Price,   I do not know.
It all sounds expensive 'pardon the pun'

In the same conversation it was made known that the Scandinavian Ethic for home produced HiFi, and possibly a contributor to why Scandinavian Audio Devices are sought after,  is a result of a using a large proportion of a Female Workforce, as it has been proven in this country that there is a noticeable consistency in the audio quality of the end devices on the production runs.

I believe the reference to the assembly of devices was not just limited to Lyngdorf's practices.
donavabdear's avatar
donavabdear
479 posts
 

When will sound reproduction become serious? 

Answer
When audiophiles use the same equipment as in the recording studio. And pay much more attention to the acoustics in their rooms.

Terms are used all the time in recording they are just a reference and usually don’t mean the same thing to everyone, as a mixer it’s your job to understand the producer and musicians terms, it’s part of the fun of recording. 

More to discover